What are Brahma Sutras?
Brahma Sutras or Vedanta Sutras are very cryptic and extremely short notes written in Sanskrit to serve as points or hints to understand without conflicts the elaborate teachings available in Upanishads (Vedanta) . The word Sutra in sanskrit means an extremely short sentence containing some information in a nutshell. Another meaning of Sutra is thread/ string. The knowledge of Brahman (God) or the teachings of Vedanta are brought together like beads in a string in this scripture.
Brahma Sutras are clues or aids to memory on the study of Vedanta. They can not be understood without a lucid commentary (Bhashya). The commentary also is in need of further elaborate explanation from a competent Guru/ Acharya for earnest students of scriptures to comprehend the subject matter.
Brahma Sutras are also known as Uttara Mimamsa. Uttara means the latter. Upanishads are the latter part of Vedas. Mimamsa means the investigation or enquiry into the connected meaning of the sacred texts.
What is its importance as a Hindu scripture?
Considering the importance of its contents, Brahma Sutra is one of the three prime source books of Hindu Philosophy having allegiance to Vedas. The Upanishads (Vedanta), The Bhagavad Gita and Brahma Sutras are the three reference books and together they are called Prasthanathraya. Upanishads are known as Shruti Prasthanam (essense of Vedic knowledge), the Bhagavad Gita is known as Smriti Prasthanam. Smritis are essence of derived, secondary knowledge from Vedas serving as guidance for practical life covering dharma shastras (teachings on righteousness), Puranas, Itihasas (mythological stories) and essential spiritual teachings. Brahma Sutras are known as Nyaya Prasthanam or Tharka Prasthanam (Logical essence of Vedantas).
When was Brahma Sutras composed? Who was its author?
Historians say that the practice of writing scriptures in the form of Sutras existed between 400 BCE to 400 CE and hence the origin of Brahma Sutras could be sometime in this period. But based on the contents of Brahma Sutra, where Buddhist and Jain philosophies too are discussed,many scholars are of the opinion that it is a work done after the period of Buddha and Mahavir (Jainism). Accordingly, some historians assess that Brahma Sutras were written some time in 2nd century CE and some say 4th Century CE.
The Rishi Badarayana Vyasa was the author of Brahma Sutra.
Vyasa is credited with compiling all 4 vedas and also authoring the epic Mahabharata and many Puranas. But the historical period of those scriptures were far earlier than the period of Brahma Sutras.
Since ‘Vyasa’ is considered a title rather than a name, it is also argued that the Vyasa of Mahabharata (known as Krishna Dvaipayana) is different from the Vyasa of Brahma Sutras (known as Badarayana).
What are the essential contents of Brahma Sutras?
Brahma Sutras essentially discuss Ontology – Nature of Man, God, Universe, life, creation and their interrelationships. It also deals a little with Eschatology — death and post-death scenario. The Sutras highlight not only on how the creation came from God (Brahman) but also how God himself is part and parcel of the created. The sutras establish that human being is essentially Atman and hint on the nature on atman and how the Atman is related to Paramatman (God, Brahman). It gives hints on spiritual practices particularly on meditation. it also throws hints on what happens at the time of death and the post death scenario of normal mortals and how it differs from the death of realized saints.
All the notes in Brahma Sutras on the above are essentially based on the teachings available in Upanishads (Vedanta), particularly on Chandogya Upanishad and Brihadaranyaka Upanishad. The Sutras also touch upon other Hindus Sashtras Mimamsa and Samkya and also on the philosophies of Buddhism and Jainism to throw hints on how Vedanta differs from their view point.
Brahma Sutras indicate renunciation as the ultimate way to attain realization. Hence it is also known as Bikshu Sutra (Bikshu means a renunciate who eats by begging food).
The Brahma Sutras have been contained in 4 Adhyayas (chapters) and each chapter contains 4 Padas (sections) . In each Pada, there are several adhikaranas (Topics or propositions) containing the Sutras. Totally, there are about 555 Sutras , based on Sri Shankaracharya’s commentaries on Brahma Sutras. They are grouped in 191 adhikaranas. Each adhikarana consist of five parts:—(1) Thesis or Vishaya, (2) Doubt or Samsaya, (3) Anti-thesis or Purvapaksha, (4) Synthesis or right conclusion or Siddhanta and (5) Sangati or agreement of the proposition with the other parts of the Sastra.
(The four chapters and their contents in Each Pada’s adhikaranas in brief are given at the end of this article).
Can a person with a rudimentary knowledge on Hindu philosophies and good knowledge in Sanskrit understand Brahma Sutras? Will reading a direct translation of Brahma Sutras in other languages be helpful in understanding Hindu philosophy on God better?
No. Not at all.
The Sutras as such will be totally incomprehensible for plain sanskrit scholars. Same is the case with direct translation too. Even with a reasonable knowledge in Hindu philosophies, one cannot make head or tail of reading Brahma Sutras directly. Brahma Sutras have to be comprehended only through commentaries (Bhashyams).
Here is a sample of a few Sutras directly translated:
From Chapter 1, Padam (Section 2):
Sutram 1: “As this teaching is popular”
Sutram 2: “As the qualities proposed match”
Sutram 3: “As not matching, it is not life force with body”
Sutram 4: “As Karma and doer are mentioned”
Sutram 5: “Due to difference in wording”
Sutram 6: “As per Smriti too”
Sutram 7: “The place is mentioned small, likewise that too is mentioned small, if cannot be God, it is not so, as it is told for meditation and as vast as sky”
Sutram 8: “If experience of pain / pleasure is present, it does not match; because of difference”
Sutram 9: “God is the eater as the entire cosmos is absorbed”
Sutram 10: “As it happens“
Doesn’t it look extremely obvious that nothing meaningful could be obtained from these even by a scholar who knows Hindu philosophies well?
On the other hand, if you take Upanishads and Bhagavad Gita, a person with rudimentary knowledge on Hindu philosophies may reasonably understand their direct translations even without explanations. It is quite likely that many doubts and confusions may linger, but still one can definitely grasp considerably on the subjects by reading the direct scripture (if knowledgeable in Sanskrit) or through direct translations.
It is obviously not so with Brahma Sutras. As already mentioned and seen, the Sutras are extremely cryptic notes, serving as systematically organized and sequentialized hints to aid and rekindle the memory of the earnest students of philosophy in relating to the larger elaborations and references taught by the gurus through the Bhashyas (commentaries).
The bhashyas relate which particular verse of which Upanishad is referred to in a Sutra; or which Sankhya philosophical text is being negated in which Sutra; or which statement from a Smriti is associated with which Sutra; what is the wholesome meaning of each Sutra or each adhikarana and so on.
If read with Bhashyams (commentaries) will the Brahma Sutras serve as an adequate source of knowledge of Hindu philosophies?
No. Brahma Sutras are NOT independent source of spiritual knowledge like Bhagavad Gita or Upanishads.
Brahma Sutras with Bhashyams, when heard through the explanations of one’s Guru, at the best serve as a guide to remove any confusions, misunderstandings and doubts on Upanishads, for those who have already studied Vedanta in depth. They can also help in clearing any added confusions on account of reading other scriptures like Mimamsa, Samkya philosophy or philosophies of Buddhism and Jainism.
Is Brahma Sutras meant more for scholars and Pundits?
Yes, more or less.
Even to understand Brahma Sutras with appropriate Bhashyams, one must have studied and reasonably grasped at least the 12 major Upanishads and Bhagavad Gita; a reasonable exposure to Purva Mimamsa, Nyaya and Samkya philosophies too are essential. In the olden days, only highly qualified and brilliant Pundits (Brahmins) with a good grasp of Sanskrit language and keen, earnest seekers of spirituality with a thirst for grasping the highest knowledge on Brahman (also possessing the knowledge of Sanskrit) were fit for learning Brahma Sutras.
It must be noted that the Bhashyams too were only in Sanskrit and a mere understanding of Sanskrit would not just help in deciphering the bhashyams too. A qualified Guru’s teaching and explanation using the bhashyams and appropriate references to the source texts in Upanishads and other scriptures are essential.
For present day scholars and earnest seekers of core philosophy of Hinduism too, the same conditions are applicable, except for the fact that they can make good with translations of the originals from Sanskrit to their own languages. In any case, the teaching from a qualified Guru can never be dispensed with.
Are there many Bhashyams (commentaries) on Brahma Sutras?
Badarayana’s disciples must have learned and memorized Brahma Sutras and also received and absorbed the Bhashyam, to be transmitted to next generations by word of mouth. Over a period of time, Sutras (and probably bhashyams) might have started appearing in written form in palm leaves. Across centuries, the original bhashyams too could have been lost.
The earliest available and reportedly the most authentic commentary on Brahma Sutras is from Sri Shankaracharya (788-820 CE) and his bhashyam is based on his Advaita philosophy. In the subsequent centuries, several other commentaries appeared from different Acharyas by offering their explanations of the particular school of philosophy they professed. Thus there are bhasyams written by Sri Bhaskara and Sri Yadava Prakasha (10th & 11th Century) based on Bheda-Abheda school of thought, Sri Ramanujacharya (11th/12th Century) based on his Vishitadvaita school of thought, Sri Madhvacharya (13th/14th Century) based on his Dvaita School of philosophy, Srikanta (13th Century) based on Saiva Siddhanta and so on.
Down the line of disciples of the masters (who wrote the original commentaries), across time, even comprehending the bhashyas got difficult, needing further enlightenment on the original bhashyams. Thus several additional explanations to the original teachings too came, written by latter disciples.
Why are there different schools of interpretations? What is the impact?
The technique of Sutras served as effective mode of teaching in a period when propagation of Vedic knowledge was primarily through word of mouth and not through writing.
But the negative outcome of this technique could be that there was tremendous scope for losing (fully or partially) the associated teachings with the Sutras, or distorting and twisting the original teachings associated with the Sutras, while the Sutras themselves, being brief, were memorized and transmitted reasonably accurately and in latter periods got written in palm leaves.
The original teachings contained in Upanishads are essentially non-dualistic (Advaita) in their core, which have been expressed by the rishis in poetic form directly based on their experience. They also contain metaphors, allegories and parables which give scope for different interpretations. We have seen already how the direct meaning of Sutras are so cryptic and vague; naturally, the sutras coupled with allegories in the Upanishads do provide enough scope for different interpretations.
The spiritual experiences attained by different acharyas at different periods of histories and their own convictions of their experiences to be truer than Advaitic experience of the rishis gave them the impetus to give different meanings to the sutras and also to the Upanishad statements; some upanishad statements also have the scope of differing from purely advaita point of view . Added to these is the scope available in Sanskrit language per se to spit or combine words to get different meanings.
Swami Shivananda says, “Sanskrit is very elastic. It is like Kamadhenu or Kalpataru. You can milk out of it various kinds of Rasas according to your intellectual calibre and spiritual experiences. There fore different Acharyas have
built different systems of thought or cults by interpreting the Sutras in their own ways and became founders of sects.”
Swami Vivekananda says, “...the problem gets compounded by the acharyas who wrote the commentaries. A commentator interpreting the Sutras from Advaita point of view retains phrases emphasizing the advaita angle, but distorts the meaning of certain words that seem to convey Dvaita concept. A sanskrit word meaning ‘birthless’ (ajah) gets conveniently distorted to read ajaa to mean a female goat! If not worse, at least in a similar fashion, the acharyas of Dvaita conveniently distort Vedic words and phrases conveying Advaita concept, while retaining those giving a dvaita angle of meaning!”
Added to this is another reality that the number of Sutras referred and quoted by these Acharyas too vary. While Sri Sankara’s commentary is based on 192 adhikaranas and 555 sutras, Sri Ramanujar’s is based 155 adhikaranas and 545 sutras and Shi Madhvar’s is based on 223 adhikaranas and 564 sutras.
Naturally, we get an impression that the writers of commentaries could have played with and distorted, to some extent, the original purport and conception of Sutras by Badanarayana!
For an English reader, which could be a good commentary on Brahma Sutras to read?
It is felt that Brahma Sutra commentaries done by Swami Shivananda (Divine Life Society, Rishikesh) which is based predominantly on Sri Shankara’s Bhashyam is a good one, very neatly arranged and written in an easily comprehensible style.
To give a birds eye view of what Brahma Sutras broadly contain, the chapter wise contents are given below (based on the above book):
(Note: Each bullet below corresponds to each adhikarana)
Chapter 1: Samanvaya Adhikaram
In the first chapter the author shows that all the Vedic texts uniformly refer to Brahman and find their Samanvaya (reconciliation) in Him.
(Ch. 1) Section (Pada) 1
- The enquiry into Brahman and its prerequisites.
- Definition of Brahman
- Brahman is realisable only through the scriptures
- Brahman is the main purport of all Vedantic texts
- Brahman (the intelligent principle) is the First Cause
- Anandamaya is Para Brahman.
- The being or person in the Sun and the eye is Brahman.
- The word Akasa must be understood as Brahman
- The word ‘Prana’ must be understood as Brahman
- The light is Brahman.
- Prana is Brahman
(Ch. 1) Section (Pada) 2
- The Manomaya is Brahman
- The eater is Brahman.
- The dwellers in the cave of the heart are the individual soul and Brahman.
- The person within the eye is Brahman.
- The internal ruler is Brahman.
- That which cannot be seen is Brahman.
- Vaisvanara is Brahman.
(Ch. 1) Section (Pada) 3
- The abode of heaven, earth etc. is Brahman
- Bhuma is Brahman
- Akshara is Brahman
- The Highest person to be meditated upon is the Highest Brahman
- The Dahara or the ‘Small Akasa’ is Brahman
- Everything shines after Brahman
- The person of the size of a thumb is Brahman
- The Devas also are entitled to the study of Vedas and to meditate on Brahman
- The right of the Sudras to the study of Vedas discussed
- The Prana in which everything trembles is Brahman
- The ‘light’ is Brahman
- The Akasa is Brahman
- The Self consisting of knowledge is Brahman
(Ch. 1) Section (Pada) 4
- The Mahat and Avyakta of the Kathopanishad do not refer to the Sankhya Tattvas.
- The Aja of Svetasvatara Upanishad does not mean Pradhana.
- The five-fold-five (Pancha-panchajanah) does not refer to the twenty-five Sankhyan categories.
- Brahman is the First cause.
- He who is the maker of the Sun, Moon, etc. is Brahman and not Prana or the individual soul.
- The Atman to be seen through hearing etc., of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (II-4-5) is Brahman and not Jivatma
- Brahman is both the efficient and the material cause
- The arguments which refute the Sankhyas refute the others also.
Chapter 2: Avirodha Adhikaram
In the second chapter, alternative concepts in other Shastras are confronted and proved that there are no conflicts in Upanishad interpretations.
(Ch. 2) Section (Pada) 1
- Refutation of Smritis not based on Srutis
- Refutation of Samkhya Yoga
- Brahman can be the cause of the universe, although It is of a contrary nature from the universe.
- Kanada and Gautama Refuted
- The distinctions of enjoyer and enjoyed do not oppose unity
- The world (ef fect) is non-dif fer ent from Brah man (the cause)
- Brahman does not create evil
- Brahman is the cause of the world
- Brahman is the material cause of the universe, though He is without parts
- Fully-equipped Brahman
- Final end of Creation
- Brahman is neither partial nor cruel
- Saguna Brahman necessary for creation
(Ch. 2) Section (Pada) 2
- Refutation of the Sankhyan theory of the Pradhana as the cause of the world.
- Refutation of the Vaiseshika view
- Refutation of the atomic theory of the Vaiseshikas
- Refutation of the Bauddha Realists
- Refutation of the Bauddha Idealist
- Refutation of the Jaina Doctrine
- Refutation of the Pasupata System
- Refutation of the Bhagavata or the Pancharatra school
(Ch. 2) Section (Pada) 3
- Ether (Akasa) is not eternal but created
- Air originates from ether
- Brahman (Sat) has no origin
- Fire originates from air
- Water is produced from fire
- Earth is created from water
- Brahman abiding within the element is the creative principle
- The process of dissolution of the elements is in the reverse order from that of creation
- The mention of the mind and intellect does not interfere with the order of creation and reabsorption as they are the products of the elements
- Births and deaths are not of the soul
- The individual soul is eternal. ‘It is not produced’
- The nature of the individual soul is intelligence
- The size of the individual soul
- The individual soul is an agent
- The soul is an agent as long as it is limited by the adjuncts
- The soul is dependent on the Lord, when he works
- Relation of the individual soul to Brahman
(Ch. 2) Section (Pada) 4
- The Pranas have their origin from Brahman
- The number of the organs (organs of knowledge and action)
- The organs are minute in size
- The chief Prana has also an origin from Brahman
- The chief Prana is different from air and sense functions
- The minuteness of the chief Prana
- The presiding deities of the organs
- The organs are independent principles and not functions of the chief Prana
- The creation of names and forms is by the Lord and not by the individual soul
Chapter 3: Sadhana Adhikaram
In the third chapter, the means of attaining Brahman are described.
(Ch. 3) Section (Pada) 1
- The soul at the time of transmigration does take with it subtle parts of the elements
- The souls descending from heaven have a remnant of Karma which determines their birth
- The fate after death of those souls whose deeds do not entitle them to pass up to Chandraloka
- The soul on its descent from the Chandraloka does not become identified with ether, etc., but attains a similarity of nature
- It takes only a short time for the descent of the soul
- When the souls enter into plants, etc., they only cling to them and do not themselves become those species
(Ch. 3) Section (Pada) 2
- The soul in the dream state
- The soul in dreamless sleep
- The same soul returns from deep sleep
- The nature of swoon
- The nature of Brahman
- The Neti-neti text explained
- Brahman is one without a second
- The Lord is the giver of the fruits of actions
(Ch. 3) Section (Pada) 3
- The Vidyas having identical or the same form found in scriptures constitute one Vidya
- Particulars of identical Vidyas mentioned in different Sakhas or places are to be combined into one meditation
- Those Vidyas with different subject-matter are separate, even if there may be some similarities
- It is appropriate to specialise OM by the term ‘Udgitha’
- Unity of the Prana-Vidya
- Attributes like Bliss, etc., of Brahman have to be combined into one meditation
- Katha Upanishad (I.3.10-11) teaches merely that the Self is higher than everything else
- The Self mentioned in Aithreya Upanishad I.1. is the Supreme Self and the attributes of the Self given elsewhere should be combined with this meditation.
- Only thinking water to be the dress of Prana is enjoined in the Prana-Vidya
- Vidyas of the same Sakha which are identical should be combined, in meditation
- The names ‘Ahar’ and ‘Aham’ of Brahman occurring in Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (V.5.1-2) cannot be combined
- Attributes of Brahman occurring in the Ranayaniya Khila constitute an independent Vidya
- The Purusha Vidya in the Chhandogya and the Taittiriya are not to be combined
- Unconnected Mantras and sacrifices mentioned in certain Upanishads do not belong to Brahma-Vidya
- The statement that the good and evil deeds of a person go respectively to his friends and enemies is true for texts that mention discarding of such actions by him
- The shaking off of good and evil by the man of Knowledge occurs only at the time of his death
- The knower of Saguna Brahman alone goes along Devayana, and not the knower of Nirguna Brahman
- The passage of the soul by Devayana applies equally to all Vidyas of Saguna Brahman
- Perfected souls may take a corporeal existence for divine mission
- The negative attributes of Brahman mentioned in various texts are to be combined in all meditations on Brahman
- Mundaka Upanishad III.1.1 and Katha Upanishad I.3.1 constitute one Vidya
- Brihadaranyaka Upanishad III.4.1 and III.5.1 constitute one Vidya
- The Sruti prescribes reciprocal meditation in Aithreya Upanishad (II.2.4.6)
- Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (V.4.1 and V.5.3) treat of one Vidya about Satya Brahman
- Attributes mentioned in Chandhyogya Upanishad (VIII.1.1) and Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (IV.4.22) are to be combined on account of several common features in both texts
- Pranagnihotra need not be observed on days of fast
- Upasanas mentioned in connection with sacrifices are not their parts, but separate
- Meditations on Vayu and Prana are to be kept separate notwithstanding the essential oneness of these two
- The fires in Agnirahasya of the Brihadaranyaka are not part of the sacrificial act, but form an independent Vidya
- Atman is an entity distinct from the body
- Upasanas connected with sacrificial acts, i.e., Udgitha Upasana are valid for all schools
- Vaisvanara Upasana is one entire Upasana
- Various Vidyas like the Sandilya Vidya, Dahara Vidya and so on are to be kept separate and not combined into one entire Upasana
- Any one of the Vidyas should be selected according to one’s own option or choice
- Vidyas yielding particular desires may or may not be combined according to one’s liking
- Meditations connected with members of sacrificial acts may or may not be combined according to one’s liking
(Ch. 3 Section (Pada) 4
- Knowledge of Brahman is independent of sacrificial acts
- Sannyasa is prescribed by the scriptures
- Scriptural texts as in Chhandhyogya Upanishad (I.1.3.) which refer to Vidyas are not mere praises but themselves enjoin the meditations
- The stories mentioned in the Upanishads do not serve the purpose of Pariplavas and so do not form part of the ritualistic acts. They are meant to euloigise the Vidya taught in them
- Sannyasins need not observe ritualistic acts, as Brahma Vidya or knowledge serves their purpose
- Works prescribed by the scriptures are means to the attainment of knowledge
- Food-restrictions may be given up only when life is in danger
- The duties of Asrama are to be performed by even one who is not desirous of salvation
- Those who stand midway qualified for knowledge; between two Asramas also are
- He who has taken Sannyasa cannot revert back to his former stages of life
- Expiation for one who has broken the vow of Sannyasa
- The life-long celibate who fails to keep up his vow must be excluded by society
- The meditations connected with the subordinate members of sacrificial acts (Yajnangas) should be observed by the priest and not by the sacrificer
- In Brihadaranyaka Upanishad ( III.5.1) meditation is enjoined besides the child-like state and scholarship
- Child-like state means the state of innocence, being free from egoism, lust, anger, etc.
- The time of the origination of knowledge when Brahma Vidya is practised
- Liberation is a state without difference. It is only one.
Chapter 4: Phala Adhikaram
In the fourth chapter the result of attaining Brahman is described.
(Ch. 4) Section (Pada) 1
- Meditation on Brahman should be continued till knowledge is attained
- He who meditates on the Supreme Brahman must comprehend It as identical with himself
- The symbols of Brahman should not be meditated upon as identical with the meditator
- When meditating on a symbol, the symbol should be considered as Brahman and not Brahman as the symbol
- In meditation on the members of sacrificial acts the idea of divinity is to be superimposed on the members and not in the reverse way.
- One is to meditate sitting.
- There is no restriction of place with regard to meditation
- Meditations should be continued till death
- Knowledge of Brahman frees one from all past and future sins.
- Similarly good work do not affect the knower of Brahman.
- Works which have not begun to yield results are alone destroyed by knowledge and not those which have already begun to bear fruits.
- Permanent obligatory works enjoined by the Vedas for different Asramas are not to be given up.
- Sacrificial works not combined with knowledge or meditation also help in the origination of knowledge
- After enjoying the fruits of Prarabdha Karma the knower becomes one with Brahman
(Ch. 4) Section (Pada) 2
- At the time of death the functions of the organs are merged in the mind.
- The function of mind is merged in Prana.
- The function of Prana is merged in the Jiva.
- The mode of departure from the body up to the way is common to both the knower of the Saguna Brahman and an ordinary man.
- The dissolution of fire etc., at the time of death in the Supreme Deity is only relative.
- The Pranas of the knower of Brahman do not depart at the time of death.
- The Pranas (organs) and elements of the knower of the Nirguna Brahman get merged in It at death.
- The Kalas of the knower of the Nirguna Brahman attain absolute non-distinction with Brahman at death
- The soul of the knower of the Saguna Brahman comes to the heart at the time of death and then goes out through the Sushumna Nadi.
- The soul of one who knows Saguna Brahman follows the rays of the sun after death and goes to Brahmaloka.
- Even if the knower of the Saguna Brahman dies in Dakshinayana, he still goes to Brahmaloka.
(Ch. 4) Section (Pada) 3
- The path connected with the deities beginning with that of light is the only path that leads to Brahmaloka.
- The departing soul reaches the deity of the year and then the deity of the air.
- After reaching the deity identified with lightning, the soul reaches the world of Varuna.
- Light, etc., referred to in the text describing the path of the gods mean deities identified with light, etc., who conduct the soul stage after stage till Brahmaloka is reached.
- The departed souls go by the path of gods to Saguna Brahman.
- Only those who have taken recourse to the worship of Brahman without a symbol attain Brahmaloka.
(Ch. 4) Section (Pada) 4
- The liberated soul does not acquire anything new but only manifests its essential or true nature.
- The released soul remains inseparable from the Supreme Soul.
- Characteristics of the soul that has attained the Nirguna Brahman.
- The soul which has attained the Saguna Brahman effects its desire by mere will.
- A liberated soul who has attained Brahmaloka can exist with or without a body according to his liking.
- The liberated soul which has attained the Saguna Brahman can animate several bodies at the same time.
- The liberated soul which has attained Brahmaloka has all the lordly powers except the power of creation.
To read the complete elaboration of the above subjects, here is the link to the site: Brahma Sutras (Swami Sivananda)
The pdf format of the book is also available for free download: Click here
- Brahma Sutram (Tamil) By Swami Asuthoshananda (By Ramakrishna Math Chennai, Year 2013)
- Deivatthin Kural (Tamil) – Part 2 (compilation of talks of Sri Kanchi Paramacharya) – Vanathi Publications, Chennai.
- Upanishad Saram (Chandogyam, Brihadaranyakam and Brahma Sutra saram) By Sri Anna Subramaniam – Tamil – Ramakrishna Math Chennai (10th Edition 2016)
- Brahma Sutras – Swami Sivananda – Divine Life Society